期刊
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 324-330出版社
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-011-0055-3
关键词
Working memory; Capacity; Capacity measures
资金
- NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD021338, R01-HD21338] Funding Source: Medline
- Divn Of Social and Economic Sciences
- Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [1024080] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
Although the measurement of working memory capacity is crucial to understanding working memory and its interaction with other cognitive faculties, there are inconsistencies in the literature on how to measure capacity. We address the measurement in the change detection paradigm, popularized by Luck and Vogel (Nature, 390, 279-281, 1997). Two measures for this task-from Pashler (Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 369-378, 1988) and Cowan (The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 87-114, 2001), respectively-have been used interchangeably, even though they may yield qualitatively different conclusions. We show that the choice between these two measures is not arbitrary. Although they are motivated by the same underlying discrete-slots working memory model, each is applicable only to a specific task; the two are never interchangeable. In the course of deriving these measures, we discuss subtle but consequential flaws in the underlying discrete-slots model. These flaws motivate revision in the modal model and capacity measures.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据